That sucks. I can see a purpose behind it for some circumstances but you shouldn't have to rely on an officer's word that there is a warrant though I guess if you found out later that there wasn't then anything they find would have to not be used.

Reading through the Idaho state code it actually gets far worse on animal related issues. While I oppose barbaric acts of cruelty forgoing due process is equally concerning.

Adopted in 1909 any "sheriff, officer, or constable" may enter any premise without a warrant where animal fights are believed to occur and arrest all persons present without a warrant.

Another law in the same section deals with inspections. It states an inspector may request a voluntary health and welfare inspection at any time. If the request is denied they are authorized to call on law enforcement to execute the inspection.

If you're concerned about local breed/species bans (local being everything up to the state level) in the US, then you could register an animal as an emotional support animal."One court has found that ‘if the County ordinance were enforced it would violate the FHA by permitting a discriminatory housing practice.’ See Warren v. Delvista Towers Condo. ass'n, Inc., 49 F. Supp. 3d 1082, 1089 (S.D. Fla. 2014)."Therefore, even if local ordinances (local being everything up to statewide laws) bans a certain animal, the animal must be permitted if it is a federally registered emotional support animal.The only way to disprove an animal being an emotional support animal would be to disqualify it being an emotional support animal. The only way to do this would be to prove that the animal is dangerous based on the specific animals behavior. The assessment of an animal as dangerous cannot be made because of the animal's breed. (breed in its legal definition is "(n.) A race or variety of men or other animals (or of plants), perpetuating its special or distinctive characteristics by inheritance.")“A housing provider may only determine if the specific assistance animal in question poses a direct threat to the health and safety of others. This determination of a ‘direct threat’ must be based on ‘individualized assessment that relies on objective evidence about the specific animal's actual conduct.’ (FHEO Notice: FHEO-2013-01 at page 3).”Although the National Service Animal Registry says that ESAs must be a domesticated animal, the legal definition of domesticated is: n. an animal, as the horse or cat, that has been tamed and kept by humans as a work animal, food source, or pet, especially a member of those species that have, through selective breeding, become notably different from their wild ancestors.It says "especially a member of those species that have, through selective breeding, become notably different from their wild ancestors," but that isn't necessary for the animal to still qualify as domesticated by definition.TL;DR: If an animal is an emotional support animal, it can be taken into counties, cities, townships, villages, and even states where that type of animal is banned as a pet. The only way that local law enforcement can deny the owners right to have the animal is to cite a specific instance in the specific animal's past where it showed aggression towards people without being provoked, therefore posing a danger to other people. It cannot be labeled dangerous based on breed/species.Edit: Added NSAR qualifications for ESA.

Last edited by Sparttan117 on Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Problem one being they will likely seize it anyway and you'll have to prove everything through a long court battle and still probably never get your animal back even if you win, as often has happened with other cases in the past.

Problem 2 being people who actually need ESA's. The ADA used to allow any animal species as a service animal but all but dogs and seeing eye horses are now no longer covered any more because of people faking it to have odd species in places they otherwise weren't allowed. This will happen with ESA's too if people start using it in this manner to be allowed to have raccoons and foxes etc in down town NY and other banned cities.

TamanduaGirl wrote:Problem 2 being people who actually need ESA's. The ADA used to allow any animal species as a service animal but all but dogs and seeing eye horses are now no longer covered any more because of people faking it to have odd species in places they otherwise weren't allowed. This will happen with ESA's too if people start using it in this manner to be allowed to have raccoons and foxes etc in down town NY and other banned cities.

I actually have been clinically diagnosed with something that would qualify me to have an ESA and I have a psychologist who has told me that he would be willing to back me up legally.Even so, I know of other ways to get into Colorado (the state that I'm concerned about) with a raccoon. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (as much as I despise some of the things they've been accused of doing) does have a permit (Scientific Collection Permit) that would allow me to legally possess animals that would otherwise be illegal.As for animal control officer seizing said animal, that's what the rest of this thread is for.